Myerchin

Myerchin v. Family Benefits, Inc.

Bad Law
162 Cal. App. 4th 1526
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 29, 2008G038569California6,133 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bedsworth, J.

We hold in this case that a party offered a monetary settlement of a lawsuit may accept the money or reject it, but may not take the money and continue the lawsuit. That is what Joseph Myerchin attempted to do in this case and that is why a summary judgment was entered against him. Shorty after accepting and spending the money paid to him pursuant to the settlement, Myerchin refused to dismiss the complaint. Instead, he argued the settlement agreement was unenforceable, because Family Benefits’ attorney had continued to negotiate it with him directly, even after becoming aware he had retained counsel. The trial court rejected the assertion the evidence of direct negotiation, even if true, rendered the agreement unenforceable, and granted summary judgment. We conclude the court was correct.

Despite Myerchin’s assertions otherwise, the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law to demonstrate the settlement agreement was the product of duress, was unconscionable, or was rendered void or unenforceable as a matter of public policy. Additionally, we agree with the trial court’s determination that Myerchin’s failure to make any effort to actually rescind the agreement,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.